Here’s an excellent article on things Christians and atheists should be able to agree on.http://www.cracked.com/article_15759_10-things-christians-atheists-can-and-mu… Notice before we even get to the list, the first thing is that celebrating the death of somebody you disagree with is a bad thing. When I posted this, I actually don’t recall if it was to a Christian or an atheist forum, the very first thing people attacked was, you guessed it, the part about celebrating people’s death. They seemed to feel they were perfectly justified and had every right to do so. So a friend asked, “well if Glenn Beck or Bachmann or Palin had something happen to them, how would you react? Like let’s say Bachmann died in a car accident?” My response was, “that would suck”. He responded, “why, don’t you think she’s dangerous if she got power?” Well I say, let’s quit pussyfooting around here. The real question is something like this. “Isn’t it totally awesome that Hitler’s dead? Shouldn’t we have cheered in the streets about that?” No, and here’s why. What you really want is Hitler to be stopped. That’s what had to happen. To me, it’s like these hypothetical questions. If you were on a plane and it got hijacked, and the guy had a bomb and the only way to stop him was to kill him, would you do it to save the thirty thousand other people on the plane? My first question is, why? Why must I kill him? Surely I could knock him out or something. Obviously you could construct your hypothetical to eliminate all alternatives, or just stipulate that, for whatever mysterious reasons we need not go into, killing him is the only way. But the question still stands, what happened to the alternatives? In the real world, they generally exist. What we really want is our hypothetical hijacker to be stopped. If we can do it without killing him, so much the better, I say. So same goes for Hitler, IMO, or Bachmann, or insert whomever you think would be dangerous holding political office or whatever. The real goal is to stop them. That doesn’t necessarily need to involve death, and even if it does, it seems peculiar to me to rejoice in the death itself, as opposed to rejoicing in the fact that the danger was averted or stopped from going any further. So that’s my take on why you shouldn’t rejoice at the death of other people. First of all, they’re human beings, with families and so forth. Second of all, in the case of the usual figures trotted out to support the case, it’s not really what you’re after anyway, you want whatever they’re doing to cease. So fine, rejoice about that all you like. But I don’t see getting all jazzed about death or other bad things happening to people.